Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Are 35mm print runs decreasing?

This is topic Are 35mm print runs decreasing? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006281

Posted by Steven J Hart (Member # 2340) on 10-21-2010, 08:43 PM:

With the DC "rollout" going strong, anyone got any insight?
•Are less 35mm prints being made? (than a year ago)
•Are the labs laying off employees?
•Are the distributors making more money because they have less prints to buy?

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-21-2010, 08:51 PM:

yes
yes
no

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 10-21-2010, 09:35 PM:

quote:
•Are less 35mm prints being made? (than a year ago)

I csn't see how they can be making the same or more. In the last year in my area, we have had 12 digital screens added which has replaced existing film screens. We just had two added to the Jackson Sqaure in Hamilton while 10 films screens were deleted at the Upper James which were replace with 9 Digital Screens close by.

quote:
•Are the labs laying off employees?

They are not doing well.

quote:
•Are the distributors making more money because they have less prints to buy?

For sure. Deluxe/Technicolour join forces

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 10-21-2010, 09:38 PM:

The digital prints cost significantly more than the film prints plus then you have the code-key fees and the VPF. Louis

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 10-21-2010, 10:17 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
The digital prints cost significantly more than the film prints plus then you have the code-key fees and the VPF. Louis

I find this very hard to believe. With printing, shipping, make-ups, threading, break downs, trailing adding, shipping agian...I find it very hard to believe that a digital hard drive would cost more.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-21-2010, 10:40 PM:

I actually discussed this with a rep of Deluxe at ShowEast...there are indeed a SLIGHT decrease in print runs in 2010 as compared to 2011. But as a percentage it isn't the kind of thing that would layoff anyone at the moment...at this point is merely a trend line.

Steve

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 10-22-2010, 05:03 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
there are indeed a SLIGHT decrease in print runs in 2010 as compared to 2011.

You do mean compared to 2009, right?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-22-2010, 06:26 AM:

Yes...I mean compared to 2009. And by slight I mean I think it was on the order of 1% less...what it appears to be is the beginning of a trend.

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 10-22-2010, 08:02 AM:

Is it possible that many theaters are still getting 35mm prints for a back-up to the digital projector? I know I have heard that many theaters are keeping their 35mm projectors installed right next to their digital projectors for "just in case".

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 10-22-2010, 08:09 AM:

Tom: no, I'm talking about the raw cost of the print on the loading dock, ready to go. Louis

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-22-2010, 08:47 AM:

I know of no theatre that gets a 35mm "backup" print. DCP is considered reliable enough not to need it.

Most of our (cinema) installations HAVE kept their 35mm projectors for flexibility reasons. If, they only have one DCinema screen and they don't think the next picture digital will be THAT big, they have the option of booking in 35mm so that the Digital movie does not get stuck in the big theatre for 6-weeks when it will barely do business for 1.

I have generally advised that if you only have one Digital system, and you don't have multiple large auditoriums of similar size, to put the Digital system in a MEDIUM sized theatre. Yes, it will sell out on opening week but you also wont tie up the biggest auditorium on what will be a dead feature 3-weeks into the run when the latest 2-week wonder movie comes out.

Once you have multiple DCinema systems, then you can put one in the large and medium sized theatres since you have the ability to start moving the titles down in size like you presently do with film.

Steve

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 10-22-2010, 12:24 PM:

Hopefully the prints they are still making will start to improve in quality if they're making less of them.

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 10-22-2010, 02:08 PM:

Steve
Your post reminds me of the first theater I worked at in the mid 80's. They had a Century JJ and would only book certain 70MM films in that house. That house was about 500 seats. The next house was less than half the size. They couldn't move the print, only get a 35 MM print when they needed to play it in another house and pay for the 35 print.

Rick

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 10-22-2010, 06:03 PM:

We were allowed a back-up print for 'BOLT' when we installed our first DLP projector. I never ran the 35mm and it left brand new.

I don't know of any distributor who supplies a standby 35 anymore...at least in Australia, but I would assume it to be the same elsewhere.

That time is past.

quote: Mark J. Marshall
Hopefully the prints they are still making will start to improve in quality if they're making less of them

I doubt that will happen. The labs will just lose staff. I agree prints are shitty now though. Our Paranormal Activity 2 moves about like it's having a dance all the way through completely destroying the intended 'video' look. Pull the plate out though and see the sprockets are steady as can be.

Sucky indeed.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-22-2010, 08:31 PM:

No, John, that's just because Paranormal Activity 2 was shot on a VHS-C camcorder and the person holding it has Parkinsons*.

*©1991-2010 Michael J. Fox